Thank You for Smoking
Supporters have cited the environmental impact of Cigarettes and the health effects of second-hand smoke as motivating factors. ..
For all that is good about Ithaca, it is affected by the peculiar liberal preoccupation with smoking. The City of Ithaca, after banning smoking in restaurants and bars in 2003, is considering extending the ban to all public places, most notably the Commons. Supporters have cited the environmental impact of Cigarettes and the health effects of second-hand smoke as motivating factors. Last week, Wegman’s announced that it would stop selling Cigarettes (this decision will affect all Wegman’s stores, not just the one in Ithaca). The preoccupation is not entirely overblown: smoking is one of the More preventable causes of mortality and morbidity; it causes cancer and emphysema; and there is also the ominous specter of corporate malfeasance. I hesitate to criticize anti-smoking efforts because I agree that smoking should be discouraged. But the moralization of smoking and smokers goes a step beyond concern for public health; the paranoia — in part a sign of an effective government advertising campaign — leads anti-smoking groups to vilify smokers and to enact bans that impinge on personal freedom. The sanctimony and revulsion associated with the effort to drive out smoking seems More at home in a Puritan village than in a liberal enclave. The adage goes “a smoker’s right to smoke ends at the entrance to someone else’s nostrils” and this is true; a non-smoker should not have to suffer the health effects of smoking. Banning smoking in bars and restaurants protects employees and non-smoking customers from being enclosed in a room full of smoke. It was discovered, in the late 1980s, that changes in price modified smoking behavior, despite the fact that Cigarettes contain nicotine, an addictive substance. Since then, state governments have imposed heavy taxes on Cigarettes. Together with advertising campaigns, these measures have caused the number of Americans who smoke to plummet, a laudable result. Cigarette butts are unsightly, but this is a litter issue rather than a smoking issue. And the environmental impact of outdoor cigarette smoking is practically non-existent, especially when compared to the pollution caused by automobiles. According to the calculations of the Ithaca Times’ James Peterson, smokers on the Commons would have to smoke 21.4 million packs of Cigarettes per day to equal the amount of fossil fuel emissions released daily by Ithaca drivers. And yet, as Peterson pointed out, bystanders do not cringe and wave their hands to diffuse the smoke when cars pass by. The health effects of passing by someone smoking a cigarette and inhaling a whiff of smoke are also negligible. Despite the assumption that some people are allergic to Cigarettes, there is no evidence that tobacco smoke causes an allergic reaction, according to Dr. David Bernstein, professor of medicine at the University of Cincinnati.(It may, however, aggravate existing allergies and cause nausea, headache and congestion after extended exposure.) Smoking should be part of the reasonable tolerance of others when one goes out in public. Restaurants may have the choice of designating their entrances as smoke-free, but banning smoking on the entire stretch of the Commons is silly; it is as if the very sight of a smoker is so bothersome to Ithacans’ delicate sensibilities that he or she needs to be slapped with a scarlet S and sent to the woods. If an informed adult, fully aware of the dangers entailed, chooses to begin or continue smoking, the decision to do so is no More a failure of moral character than the decision to drink alcohol, overeat or drive without a seat belt. I do not understand the vitriol directed at smokers, evidenced in this local message board post: “Personally, I will not miss the smokers who head over to Tops to shop instead. [Wegman’s] will get extra business from me to help make up for it.” Again, this is as much about smoking as it is about the evil of smokers. Wegman’s is certainly “making a statement” about tobacco, but one wonders why they are not also making a statement about obesity or alcoholism. Obesity is a leading health concern in the country: should Wegman’s refuse to sell fatty or sugary foods to overweight people? Or refuse to sell beer because it causes liver damage? As socially conscious as Ithacans are supposed to be, vehement support for the smoking ban overlooks another liberal sacred cow. The poor smoke in disproportionate numbers, so they bear the brunt of cigarette taxes and smoking bans, and end up shopping at Tops instead of Wegman’s.